Sunday, February 24, 2008
Impersonators. Imposters.
.
It's Sunday and after the brief kerfuffle on Bill Tieleman's blog yesterday, I'm still thinking about anonymity and what it means.
For bloggers, I like to think it's a protective measure, shielding friends, neighbours, relatives, employees from embarrassment or repercussions if they want to give voice to some true thoughts or speculation on a number of subjects. The way I see it, anonymity in blogger-world is a good thing because it can lead to freer speech and deeper thoughts.
It's Sunday and after the brief kerfuffle on Bill Tieleman's blog yesterday, I'm still thinking about anonymity and what it means.
For bloggers, I like to think it's a protective measure, shielding friends, neighbours, relatives, employees from embarrassment or repercussions if they want to give voice to some true thoughts or speculation on a number of subjects. The way I see it, anonymity in blogger-world is a good thing because it can lead to freer speech and deeper thoughts.
I especially like anonymity with a User Name -- not for personal identity -- but so that we can follow each train of thought. Like for PG, Kootcoot, Lynx, etc.
This web-site receives excellent contributions from completely Anonymous contributors. I read them all before they are posted and if any comments fail the smell-test, they are deleted.
One of my favourite commentors is earseyeswideopen. Special note: that's ears and eyes, both wide open. This person has been a loyal supporter of this web-site, has given us valuable information, and has encouraged our efforts to follow the issues surrounding BC Rail.
So yesterday I knew something was wrong when I encountered eyeswideopen [Special note: that's "eyes" only] on Bill Tieleman's web-site. Check that again: eyeswideopen. Did you think it was our old friend? Some people did ... even though it isn't quite the same User Name, was harshly critical of the RCMP, and has a generally nasty tone. Such as:
Mary your tirades clearly suggest that by virtue of the fact basi and virk were investigated and charged they must be guilty. Go back and check your own words. This is your analysis.
Nobody who reads The Legislature Raids could believe that accusation to be true. Readers know that, from Day One, I have deleted any comment if it even suggests guilt. So obviously this imposter doesn't read this web-site but (my guess) is only following orders.
You might call that an imposter. Or an impersonator. Or a Media Monitor - someone who is on salary to distribute propaganda. Their "job" is to manipulate the truth, for some unknown person's specific purpose. In other words, to double-cross the very citizens who might well be paying their salaries.
Don't tell me not to bother with these people or their messages. Or, stated another way: please don't imagine that there's only one, two, ten, or 50 of these Media Monitors operating in B.C.
Don't tell me that political parties always do this. Try to understand that there were 185 new "Public Affairs Officers" appointed in September 2006 under Order-in-Council #656. That's in addition to the ones added later, and the ones already on the provincial government payroll. At a guess, let's say 300 people whose salaries are paid by the BC taxpayers. What are they all doing?
We know, for example, that Dave Basi was staging phone-in and heckling campaigns for the Minister of Finance, Gary Collins. We know that Basi reported at least once by telephone to the premier on these successful enterprises.
This isn't even political campaigning, bad as that would be if done by government employees on the public payroll. No, this is worse, if in fact government is trying to control the free domain of public thought.
And yesterday's example suggests that this rotten system of thought-control is still functioning in B.C. Pity.
The real earseyeswideopen had the last word on Bill Tieleman's blog:
earseyeswideopen said...
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
This web-site receives excellent contributions from completely Anonymous contributors. I read them all before they are posted and if any comments fail the smell-test, they are deleted.
One of my favourite commentors is earseyeswideopen. Special note: that's ears and eyes, both wide open. This person has been a loyal supporter of this web-site, has given us valuable information, and has encouraged our efforts to follow the issues surrounding BC Rail.
So yesterday I knew something was wrong when I encountered eyeswideopen [Special note: that's "eyes" only] on Bill Tieleman's web-site. Check that again: eyeswideopen. Did you think it was our old friend? Some people did ... even though it isn't quite the same User Name, was harshly critical of the RCMP, and has a generally nasty tone. Such as:
Mary your tirades clearly suggest that by virtue of the fact basi and virk were investigated and charged they must be guilty. Go back and check your own words. This is your analysis.
Nobody who reads The Legislature Raids could believe that accusation to be true. Readers know that, from Day One, I have deleted any comment if it even suggests guilt. So obviously this imposter doesn't read this web-site but (my guess) is only following orders.
You might call that an imposter. Or an impersonator. Or a Media Monitor - someone who is on salary to distribute propaganda. Their "job" is to manipulate the truth, for some unknown person's specific purpose. In other words, to double-cross the very citizens who might well be paying their salaries.
Don't tell me not to bother with these people or their messages. Or, stated another way: please don't imagine that there's only one, two, ten, or 50 of these Media Monitors operating in B.C.
Don't tell me that political parties always do this. Try to understand that there were 185 new "Public Affairs Officers" appointed in September 2006 under Order-in-Council #656. That's in addition to the ones added later, and the ones already on the provincial government payroll. At a guess, let's say 300 people whose salaries are paid by the BC taxpayers. What are they all doing?
We know, for example, that Dave Basi was staging phone-in and heckling campaigns for the Minister of Finance, Gary Collins. We know that Basi reported at least once by telephone to the premier on these successful enterprises.
This isn't even political campaigning, bad as that would be if done by government employees on the public payroll. No, this is worse, if in fact government is trying to control the free domain of public thought.
And yesterday's example suggests that this rotten system of thought-control is still functioning in B.C. Pity.
The real earseyeswideopen had the last word on Bill Tieleman's blog:
earseyeswideopen said...
I want it to be made clear that I am NOT 'eyes wide open' ...
For whatever reasons someone would use an identity so close as to appear to be my comment, I am NOT amused.
I chose my blogger identity a long time ago & ask that that person above please select another name to post under.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Well said, earseyeswideopen! - BC Mary.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Comments:
<< Home
Thanks Mary - this reminds me of an attack of the "sock puppets" at Wikipedia over Basi-Virk case issues involving key Crown witness Erik Bornmann.
In that situation severe editing of Wikipedia articles mentioning or linking pieces I'd written for the Tyee, 24 hours and the Georgia Straight had taken place.
You can read my report on it at:
Bill Tieleman
Hopefully these odious individuals, wherever they may work or reside, will find the courage to stand behind their posts or piss off.
In that situation severe editing of Wikipedia articles mentioning or linking pieces I'd written for the Tyee, 24 hours and the Georgia Straight had taken place.
You can read my report on it at:
Bill Tieleman
Hopefully these odious individuals, wherever they may work or reside, will find the courage to stand behind their posts or piss off.
Beauty is truth, and truth beauty. It's hard to believe that some people don't care about either. Even harder to believe that a lot of the people who don't care about such things consider themselves superior to the truth seekers, often simply because of their religion, which often involves Jesus, who I don't know that well but who I think was a truth seeker of some kind. Crazy world. Apparently some human aspects of it never change.
# posted by 
: February 25, 2008 at 7:22 a.m.
: February 25, 2008 at 7:22 a.m.
Express Collision Shop Said,
Good Morning all. I know we have a few hundred media monitors in this province and not just from the government offices. Collision and auto glass shops from Fort St. John to Victoria are very interested in this trial. These shops have been concerned regarding cozy relationships with lobbyist's,car dealers and government/insurance types. There were some blogger/imposters very busy last spring on this website. I can tell you that it may take some time,but the ---- will hit the fan. This trial has plenty of people involved in many,many ways that reach right across Canada.
The comments and suggestions of a parallel investigation going on possibly regarding secret witness's is interesting. Organized crime groups involved is downright scary in more than a few ways.
If you want to know of some of the shenanigans going on at ICBC lately,check out the media reports two weeks ago and ICBC's Research and Training Center in Burnaby. ICBC's website has a press release with info on allegations about some of the 12 employees and disclosure concerns regarding salvage or written off vehicles going back 10 years. There has been a resignation and the center was closed down and locked up with security guards for a few days. ICBC are inspecting 174 vehicles regarding more than just disclosure problems. Oh, and by the way these are the ICBC employees that teach the collision industry how to repair your vehicles safely and correctly.
Good Morning all. I know we have a few hundred media monitors in this province and not just from the government offices. Collision and auto glass shops from Fort St. John to Victoria are very interested in this trial. These shops have been concerned regarding cozy relationships with lobbyist's,car dealers and government/insurance types. There were some blogger/imposters very busy last spring on this website. I can tell you that it may take some time,but the ---- will hit the fan. This trial has plenty of people involved in many,many ways that reach right across Canada.
The comments and suggestions of a parallel investigation going on possibly regarding secret witness's is interesting. Organized crime groups involved is downright scary in more than a few ways.
If you want to know of some of the shenanigans going on at ICBC lately,check out the media reports two weeks ago and ICBC's Research and Training Center in Burnaby. ICBC's website has a press release with info on allegations about some of the 12 employees and disclosure concerns regarding salvage or written off vehicles going back 10 years. There has been a resignation and the center was closed down and locked up with security guards for a few days. ICBC are inspecting 174 vehicles regarding more than just disclosure problems. Oh, and by the way these are the ICBC employees that teach the collision industry how to repair your vehicles safely and correctly.
# posted by : February 25, 2008 at 10:32 a.m.
: February 25, 2008 at 10:32 a.m.
Thanks for that Express Collision Shop Guy - I heard a single radio report about that on CBC AM a couple weeks ago, meant to check into it further and promptly forgot. Funny how certain assumptions and attitudes can permeate a whole organization isn’t it?
I heard the CEO of the New Car Dealers on the CBC noon show today promoting new car sales as a green option - 'Any New Car is better than a used car' ....I think that was his mantra.
Do you suppose they recite that in unison and harmony at meetings of the brotherhood?
Keep the pressure up!
I heard the CEO of the New Car Dealers on the CBC noon show today promoting new car sales as a green option - 'Any New Car is better than a used car' ....I think that was his mantra.
Do you suppose they recite that in unison and harmony at meetings of the brotherhood?
Keep the pressure up!
oint of Privilege
(continued)
L. Krog: I rise to speak to my point of privilege first raised in this House on Monday, February 18, 2008, and then again reserved this morning. I wish to outline the factual support for my contention that this House should find that the Premier has misled this House and that he be directed by the House to apologize. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The matters which consolidated this point of privilege were brought to my attention on Monday, February 18, 2008, and so I rose in the House on that day to register my point of privilege. In addition, new matters came to light on Friday, February 22, 2008, which raise an additional point of privilege, which I will also address in my remarks. I rose this morning at first opportunity to reserve my right to speak to this point of privilege. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The following outlines the factual basis for my points of privilege. During Committee of Supply, spring session 2007, the Leader of the Opposition asked the Premier questions about the process regarding the disclosure of documents in Regina v. Dave Basi, Bobby Singh Virk and Aneal Basi. The Premier responded on numerous occasions that the Premier's office was not consulted nor involved in the determination of which documents should be disclosed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I quote the Premier. "There is a special prosecutor involved in this. The Premier's office does not have a direct input into that. Certainly not with this government." That's Hansard, May 28, 2007, afternoon sitting. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Premier again: "I can tell you right now, hon. Chair, this Premier's office is not involved directly in that." Hansard, May 28, 2007, afternoon sitting. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1430]
Again the Premier: "The Deputy Attorney General will determine who, in fact, and what kind of documentation will be made available within the confines of the law as it currently [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
H049/bah/1430
2007, afternoon sitting. Again the Premier: "The Deputy Attorney General will determine who in fact and what kind of documentation will be made available within the confines of the law as it currently exists, and he will not consult with the Premier's office with regard to that." Again, Hansard, May 28, 2007. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Last week it came to my attention that an entirely different protocol was developed and implemented in January 2004. According to an article authored by the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly and published in the Parliamentarian, after consultation with the Speaker in December 2003, the government developed a five-stage protocol to handle these potentially sensitive cabinet documents. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That's contained in "The execution of search warrants in the British Columbia Parliament Buildings," Kate Ryan-Lloyd, the Parliamentarian, 2004, issue 2, page 158. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
According to the article, four of the five stages were: (1) a lawyer selected by the government must sever any documents that contain deliberations of the province's executive council; (2) the associate chief justice reviews these documents and decides if they are relevant to the police investigation; (3) if confidential cabinet documents were found to be relevant to the criminal investigation, those documents would be sent to the deputy cabinet secretary to confirm that the material is to remain confidential; (4) if the documents in question are considered to be confidential, the associate chief justice asks the special prosecutor and other prosecutors to argue in closed court whether the information is to remain confidential in law. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That's at page 160. Further to this, I located an article dated January 15, 2004, in The Vancouver Sun, which describes a fifth step that would take place after the documents were sent to the deputy cabinet secretary, who was at that time Ms. Joy Illington. "If Illington requires the assistance of the executive council, she must appear before dome in a closed courtroom and ask permission to discuss the confidential matter with the executive council. "Charges expected soon in drug probe," Lori Culbert and Jim Beatty, The Vancouver Sun, January 15, 2004, page A01. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The authors of the story summed up the situation in this way: "The documents considered privileged will go through a longer vetting process that can involve the provincial government's executive council." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In addition, in December 2007 the government counsel, George Copley, advised the court that he did not begin to receive advice from the Deputy Attorney General on matters of privilege until July 2007. "Basi-Virk defence alleges solicitor-client privilege claim instructions in case came from B.C. cabinet," Bill Tieleman, December 14, 2007 — Tieleman blogspot, etc. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Finally, on February 22, 2008, The Province columnist Michael Smyth reported on an interview with Deputy Attorney General Allan Seckel. Smith noted that: "In the immediate aftermath of the raid, the government established a protocol for reviewing internal records to see if they should be released or deemed privileged and kept under wraps. Two bureaucrats from Campbell's office" — that's the way the quote reads — "Joy Illington and, later, Elizabeth McMillan, were assigned the task, but that changed last year over concerns that the process looked too cozy." "Premier should stay clear of B.C. Rail," Michael Smyth, The Province, February 22, 2008, page A04. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Michael Smyth then quoted Allan Seckel as saying: "There was a concern, as this appeared to be getting a political life to it, that it would be prudent to not have the Premier's office involved in any way in these decisions." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Therefore, I have raised my matters of privilege, reserved on two occasions, in that the Premier knowingly misled the House on May 28, 2007, by stating that the Premier's office was not involved in the review of documents when he knew that a process that included the Premier's office was in place since 2004 and continued until at least 2007. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I am also submitting, hon. Speaker, the required accompanying motion. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. de Jong: Thanks, Mr. Speaker, and to the member for the submissions. I reserve the right to respond more fully in due course. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
(continued)
L. Krog: I rise to speak to my point of privilege first raised in this House on Monday, February 18, 2008, and then again reserved this morning. I wish to outline the factual support for my contention that this House should find that the Premier has misled this House and that he be directed by the House to apologize. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The matters which consolidated this point of privilege were brought to my attention on Monday, February 18, 2008, and so I rose in the House on that day to register my point of privilege. In addition, new matters came to light on Friday, February 22, 2008, which raise an additional point of privilege, which I will also address in my remarks. I rose this morning at first opportunity to reserve my right to speak to this point of privilege. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The following outlines the factual basis for my points of privilege. During Committee of Supply, spring session 2007, the Leader of the Opposition asked the Premier questions about the process regarding the disclosure of documents in Regina v. Dave Basi, Bobby Singh Virk and Aneal Basi. The Premier responded on numerous occasions that the Premier's office was not consulted nor involved in the determination of which documents should be disclosed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I quote the Premier. "There is a special prosecutor involved in this. The Premier's office does not have a direct input into that. Certainly not with this government." That's Hansard, May 28, 2007, afternoon sitting. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Premier again: "I can tell you right now, hon. Chair, this Premier's office is not involved directly in that." Hansard, May 28, 2007, afternoon sitting. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1430]
Again the Premier: "The Deputy Attorney General will determine who, in fact, and what kind of documentation will be made available within the confines of the law as it currently [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
H049/bah/1430
2007, afternoon sitting. Again the Premier: "The Deputy Attorney General will determine who in fact and what kind of documentation will be made available within the confines of the law as it currently exists, and he will not consult with the Premier's office with regard to that." Again, Hansard, May 28, 2007. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Last week it came to my attention that an entirely different protocol was developed and implemented in January 2004. According to an article authored by the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly and published in the Parliamentarian, after consultation with the Speaker in December 2003, the government developed a five-stage protocol to handle these potentially sensitive cabinet documents. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That's contained in "The execution of search warrants in the British Columbia Parliament Buildings," Kate Ryan-Lloyd, the Parliamentarian, 2004, issue 2, page 158. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
According to the article, four of the five stages were: (1) a lawyer selected by the government must sever any documents that contain deliberations of the province's executive council; (2) the associate chief justice reviews these documents and decides if they are relevant to the police investigation; (3) if confidential cabinet documents were found to be relevant to the criminal investigation, those documents would be sent to the deputy cabinet secretary to confirm that the material is to remain confidential; (4) if the documents in question are considered to be confidential, the associate chief justice asks the special prosecutor and other prosecutors to argue in closed court whether the information is to remain confidential in law. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That's at page 160. Further to this, I located an article dated January 15, 2004, in The Vancouver Sun, which describes a fifth step that would take place after the documents were sent to the deputy cabinet secretary, who was at that time Ms. Joy Illington. "If Illington requires the assistance of the executive council, she must appear before dome in a closed courtroom and ask permission to discuss the confidential matter with the executive council. "Charges expected soon in drug probe," Lori Culbert and Jim Beatty, The Vancouver Sun, January 15, 2004, page A01. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The authors of the story summed up the situation in this way: "The documents considered privileged will go through a longer vetting process that can involve the provincial government's executive council." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In addition, in December 2007 the government counsel, George Copley, advised the court that he did not begin to receive advice from the Deputy Attorney General on matters of privilege until July 2007. "Basi-Virk defence alleges solicitor-client privilege claim instructions in case came from B.C. cabinet," Bill Tieleman, December 14, 2007 — Tieleman blogspot, etc. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Finally, on February 22, 2008, The Province columnist Michael Smyth reported on an interview with Deputy Attorney General Allan Seckel. Smith noted that: "In the immediate aftermath of the raid, the government established a protocol for reviewing internal records to see if they should be released or deemed privileged and kept under wraps. Two bureaucrats from Campbell's office" — that's the way the quote reads — "Joy Illington and, later, Elizabeth McMillan, were assigned the task, but that changed last year over concerns that the process looked too cozy." "Premier should stay clear of B.C. Rail," Michael Smyth, The Province, February 22, 2008, page A04. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Michael Smyth then quoted Allan Seckel as saying: "There was a concern, as this appeared to be getting a political life to it, that it would be prudent to not have the Premier's office involved in any way in these decisions." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Therefore, I have raised my matters of privilege, reserved on two occasions, in that the Premier knowingly misled the House on May 28, 2007, by stating that the Premier's office was not involved in the review of documents when he knew that a process that included the Premier's office was in place since 2004 and continued until at least 2007. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I am also submitting, hon. Speaker, the required accompanying motion. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. de Jong: Thanks, Mr. Speaker, and to the member for the submissions. I reserve the right to respond more fully in due course. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
# posted by : February 25, 2008 at 4:11 p.m.
: February 25, 2008 at 4:11 p.m.
Thanks, BC Mary for bringing this issue forward to your site. Media Monitors are rampant spinning the Govt's skewed garbage everywhich way. What a waste of OUR money but you can spot them a mile away.
I was quite shocked to see someone try to deceive & confuse readers in this way. You are the last person that can be accused of "tirades" & they couldn't even get my name right LOL.
You have established yourself on your site as a solid source of ALL information/perspectives laid out like a smörgåsbord for everyone to digest, related to the Raid on the Leg. I receive Google Alerts related to your Blog consistently, so you are spreading the word effectively.
You have gained my total respect for all you are doing for British Columbians! Thanks a million.
Carry on please, doing what you do SO well.
I was quite shocked to see someone try to deceive & confuse readers in this way. You are the last person that can be accused of "tirades" & they couldn't even get my name right LOL.
You have established yourself on your site as a solid source of ALL information/perspectives laid out like a smörgåsbord for everyone to digest, related to the Raid on the Leg. I receive Google Alerts related to your Blog consistently, so you are spreading the word effectively.
You have gained my total respect for all you are doing for British Columbians! Thanks a million.
Carry on please, doing what you do SO well.
# posted by : February 26, 2008 at 5:51 p.m.
: February 26, 2008 at 5:51 p.m.
I think it is very important to re-visit the fact that there are upwards of 200-300 paid-from-the-public-purse people out there making sure that when it comes to Campbell and his lot that what you see is not what you get.
Pay attention electorate!
Post a Comment
Pay attention electorate!
# posted by : February 27, 2008 at 10:17 a.m.
: February 27, 2008 at 10:17 a.m. << Home
